Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to protect customers with prepayment energy meters this winter.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Many customers choose prepayment meters to help them budget and avoid going into debt. Ofgem rules require energy suppliers to offer emergency and additional support credit or alternative short-term support to help prepayment meter customers stay on supply.
The Energy Price Guarantee will ensure that a typical household will pay on average £2,500 a year on their energy bill for the next two years from 1 October 2022. This includes prepayment customers, and will save a typical household £1,000 a year based on current energy prices.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to reduce the number of new prepayment energy meters installed this upcoming winter.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Many customers prefer prepayment meters to help them budget.
Ofgem’s License Conditions require suppliers to consider all options for appropriate debt management. This can include installing a prepayment meter, but suppliers have to consider whether this is safe and practicable, including whether a prepayment meter is appropriate for the specific customer. Ofgem rules restrict the force fitting of a prepayment meter to repay debt except as a last resort.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask His Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the number of (1) forced prepay energy meter installs, and (2) forced prepay energy meter switches, that will take place this winter.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The Government does not make an estimate of the number of prepayment meters installed or switched. The energy Regulator, Ofgem, has reported that the number of prepayment meters installed for debt under warrant in 2021 was 49,552.
Ofgem rules restrict the force fitting of a prepayment meter to repay debt except as a last resort.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to their policy paper Ambitious, Safe, Responsible: Our approach to the delivery of AI enabled capability in Defence, published on 15 June, which states that weapons that identify, select and attack targets without context-appropriate human involvement "are not acceptable", whether they will be supporting the negotiation of a legally binding international instrument that both (1) prohibits autonomous weapons that identify, select and attack targets without context-appropriate human involvement, and (2) regulates other autonomous weapons systems to ensure meaningful human control over the use of force.
Answered by Baroness Goldie - Shadow Minister (Defence)
The UK does not support calls for further legally binding rules that prohibit autonomous weapons that identify, select and attack targets without context-appropriate human involvement and regulate other autonomous systems. International Humanitarian Law already provides a robust, principle-based framework for the regulation of development and use of all weapons systems including weapons that contain autonomous functions.
Without international consensus on the definitions or characteristics of weapons with levels of autonomy, a legal instrument would have to ban undefined systems, which would present difficulties in the application of any such ban and which could severely impact legitimate research and development of AI or autonomous technologies.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to their policy paper Ambitious, Safe, Responsible: Our approach to the delivery of AI enabled capability in Defence, published on 15 June, which says that "We do not rule out incorporating AI within weapon systems" and that real-time human supervision of such systems "may act as an unnecessary and inappropriate constraint on operational performance", when this would be seen as a constraint; and whether they can provide assurance that the UK's weapon systems will remain under human supervision at the point when any decision to take a human life is made.
Answered by Baroness Goldie - Shadow Minister (Defence)
The 'Ambitious, Safe, Responsible' policy sets out that the Ministry of Defence opposes the creation and use of AI enabled weapon systems which operate without meaningful and context-appropriate human involvement throughout their lifecycle. This involvement could take the form of real-time human supervision, or control exercised through the setting of a system's operational parameters.
We believe that Human-Machine teaming delivers the best outcomes in terms of overall effectiveness. However, in certain cases it may be appropriate to exert rigorous human control over AI-enabled systems through a range of safeguards, process and technical controls without always requiring some form of real-time human supervision. For example, in the context of defending a maritime platform against hypersonic weapons, defensive systems may need to be able to detect incoming threats and open fire faster than a human could react.
In all cases, human responsibility for the use of AI must be clearly established, and that responsibility underpinned by a clear and consistent articulation of the means by which human control is exercised across the system lifecycle, including the nature and limitations of that control.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to their policy paper Ambitious, Safe, Responsible: Our approach to the delivery of AI enabled capability in Defence, published on 15 June, what assessment they have made of the specific ethical problems raised by autonomous weapons that are used to target humans and which have been raised by the International Committee of the Red Cross.
Answered by Baroness Goldie - Shadow Minister (Defence)
We're very aware of the ethical concerns raised by numerous stakeholders including the ICRC around the potential misuse of AI in Defence, including its impact on humans and the potential use of autonomous systems in ways which might violate international law. We published the Ambitious, Safe, Responsible specifically in order to ensure clarity and support ongoing conversations around the UK approach.
With respect to autonomous weapons systems: the UK's focus is on setting clear international norms for the safe and responsible development and use of AI, to ensure compliance with International Humanitarian Law through meaningful and context-appropriate levels of human control. We propose development of a compendium of good practice mapped against a weapon systems' lifecycle which would provide a clear framework for the operationalisation of the eleven guiding principles agreed by the UN Group of Government Experts on Certain Conventional Weapons 2017-19.
We are keen to continue extensive discussions on this issue with the international community and NGOs on this issue, including through discussions at the UN.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how they are (1) monitoring, and (2) enforcing, the requirement to provide all workers and contractors in the gig economy with a written statement of their core terms of employment.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Since 6 April 2020, it is now a statutory right for workers to receive a written statement setting out the main particulars of their employment. The employer must provide the principal statement on the first day of employment and the wider written statement within 2 months of the start of employment and failure of an employer to provide one could risk legal action. If an individual has not been provided a written statement, individuals must first informally raise the issue with their employer. If individuals still do not receive one, they can raise a formal grievance.
Enforcement of this right is carried out in the Employment Tribunal system whereby employees who do not receive a written statement, or who believe it to be inaccurate or incomplete, may refer the matter to an employment tribunal. Tribunals can then clarify what particulars should have been provided to employees. The particulars clarified in this way can be used as evidence in any claim arising from breaches of the employee’s terms and conditions.
The following table shows the number of claims the Employment Tribunals have received in relation to ‘Written Statement of terms and conditions.’ This is not broken down by economic sector nor does it show the outcomes of the claims. Further information on this breakdown can be accessed via the GOV.UK website.
Financial Year | Quarter | Type of Jurisdiction Complaint |
Written statement of terms and conditions | ||
2019/20 | Q1 | 352 |
| Q2 | 327 |
| Q3 | 295 |
| Q4r | 313 |
2020/21 | Q1 | 203 |
r = figures have been revised as part of an annual reconciliation exercise
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) the impact, and (2) the effectiveness, of requiring employers in the gig economy to provide workers and contractors with a written statement of their core terms of employment.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
In response to the Taylor Review, the Government recognised that there was a significant lack of awareness among individuals and employers about applicable rights and responsibilities in non-standard contracts. We therefore amended legislation so that the Employment Rights Act 1996 entitles both employees and workers to receive a written statement of employment particulars that sets out the position regarding remuneration and hours of work etc.
It is now a statutory right to receive a written statement setting out the main particulars of their employment and the employer must provide the principal statement on the first day of employment and the wider written statement within 2 months of the start of employment.
Though the Government regularly takes views from businesses, business groups, and unions on the impact and effectiveness of employment rights legislation, we do not currently have plans to review the impact or implementation of this specific requirement.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many companies have been subject to sanctions or enforcement action for failing to provide workers and contractors in the gig economy with a written statement of their core terms of employment in (1) 2019, and (2) 2020.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Since 6 April 2020, it is now a statutory right for workers to receive a written statement setting out the main particulars of their employment. The employer must provide the principal statement on the first day of employment and the wider written statement within 2 months of the start of employment and failure of an employer to provide one could risk legal action. If an individual has not been provided a written statement, individuals must first informally raise the issue with their employer. If individuals still do not receive one, they can raise a formal grievance.
Enforcement of this right is carried out in the Employment Tribunal system whereby employees who do not receive a written statement, or who believe it to be inaccurate or incomplete, may refer the matter to an employment tribunal. Tribunals can then clarify what particulars should have been provided to employees. The particulars clarified in this way can be used as evidence in any claim arising from breaches of the employee’s terms and conditions.
The following table shows the number of claims the Employment Tribunals have received in relation to ‘Written Statement of terms and conditions.’ This is not broken down by economic sector nor does it show the outcomes of the claims. Further information on this breakdown can be accessed via the GOV.UK website.
Financial Year | Quarter | Type of Jurisdiction Complaint |
Written statement of terms and conditions | ||
2019/20 | Q1 | 352 |
| Q2 | 327 |
| Q3 | 295 |
| Q4r | 313 |
2020/21 | Q1 | 203 |
r = figures have been revised as part of an annual reconciliation exercise
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Department for Work and Pensions offers any guidance to Jobcentres on whether, and in what circumstances, it is appropriate to signpost or refer their clients to local food banks.
Answered by Baroness Buscombe
The Department for Work and Pensions does not refer claimants to food banks, but provides operational instructions to Jobcentre colleagues detailing when it is appropriate to signpost claimants to food banks.